Quantitative decision-making in randomized Phase II studies with a time-to-event endpoint

被引:4
作者
Huang, Bo [1 ]
Talukder, Enayet [1 ]
Han, Lixin [2 ]
Kuan, Pei-Fen [3 ]
机构
[1] Pfizer Inc, 445 Eastern Point Rd, Groton, CT 06340 USA
[2] Sarepta Therapeut, Cambridge, MA USA
[3] SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Appl Math & Stat, Stony Brook, NY 11794 USA
关键词
Bayesian; Go/No-Go; probability of success; proof-of-concept; time-to-event; GO/NO-GO DECISIONS; SAMPLE-SIZE; BAYESIAN-APPROACH; CLINICAL-TRIAL; PROBABILITY; SUCCESS;
D O I
10.1080/10543406.2018.1489400
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
One of the most critical decision points in clinical development is Go/No-Go decision-making after a proof-of-concept study. Traditional decision-making relies on a formal hypothesis testing with control of type I and type II error rates, which is limited by assessing the strength of efficacy evidence in a small isolated trial. In this article, we propose a quantitative Bayesian/frequentist decision framework for Go/No-Go criteria and sample size evaluation in Phase II randomized studies with a time-to-event endpoint. By taking the uncertainty of treatment effect into consideration, we propose an integrated quantitative approach for a program when both the Phase II and Phase III trials share a common endpoint while allowing a discount of the observed Phase II data. Our results confirm the argument that an increase in the sample size of a Phase II trial will result in greater increase in the probability of success of a Phase III trial than increasing the Phase III trial sample size by equal amount. We illustrate the steps in quantitative decision-making with a real example of a randomized Phase II study in metastatic pancreatic cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:189 / 202
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   On the estimation of intracluster correlation for time-to-event outcomes in cluster randomized trials [J].
Kalia, Sumeet ;
Klar, Neil ;
Donner, Allan .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2016, 35 (30) :5551-5560
[22]   Estimation in multi-arm two-stage trials with treatment selection and time-to-event endpoint [J].
Bruckner, Matthias ;
Titman, Andrew ;
Jaki, Thomas .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (20) :3137-3153
[23]   Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: PART II - binary and time-to-event outcomes [J].
Riley, Richard D. ;
Snell, Kym I. E. ;
Ensor, Joie ;
Burke, Danielle L. ;
Harrell, Frank E., Jr. ;
Moons, Karel G. M. ;
Collins, Gary S. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2019, 38 (07) :1276-1296
[24]   Emergency decision-making under an uncertain time limit [J].
Taheri, Ehsan ;
Wang, Chen ;
Doost, Elmira Zahmat .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2023, 95
[25]   Analysis methods for covariate-constrained cluster randomized trials with time-to-event outcomes [J].
Crisp, Amy M. ;
Halloran, M. Elizabeth ;
Hitchings, Matt D. T. ;
Longini, Ira M. ;
Dean, Natalie E. .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2025, 25 (01)
[26]   Bayesian decision theoretic two-stage design in phase II clinical trials with survival endpoint [J].
Zhao, Lili ;
Taylor, Jeremy M. G. ;
Schuetze, Scott M. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 31 (17) :1804-1820
[27]   Bayesian decision sequential analysis with survival endpoint in phase II clinical trials [J].
Zhao, Lili ;
Woodworth, George .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2009, 28 (09) :1339-1352
[28]   Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome [J].
Royston, Patrick ;
Parmar, Mahesh K. B. .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2013, 13
[29]   A semiparametric type II Tobit model for time-to-event data with application to a merger and acquisition study [J].
Li, Yilin ;
Zheng, Ming ;
Yu, Wen .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED STATISTICS, 2019, 46 (07) :1228-1245
[30]   How are missing data in covariates handled in observational time-to-event studies in oncology? A systematic review [J].
Carroll, Orlagh U. ;
Morris, Tim P. ;
Keogh, Ruth H. .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2020, 20 (01)